ABSTRACT
From Morris’s first definition of Pragmatics as the study of the relation between signs and their users (1938: 6–7), this is one aspect all approaches to pragmatics have in common, which has set it apart from previous approaches to linguistics looking at language as an abstract, idealised system. The shift from langue/competence to parole/performance is of course crucial for Discourse Analysis, and subsequently the critical study of discourse, which I will henceforth term Critical Discourse Studies or CDS, and I see it as including any critical approach to discourse such as Critical Linguistics, Feminist Linguistics, Critical Discourse Analysis, areas of Intercultural Communication, etc. Although much of the chapter focusses on aspects of and work within Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), I also make reference to critical scholars who would not necessarily label themselves as CD Analysts. Therefore, I use the acronym CDA when referring to scholars specifically aligning themselves with the CDA field, and CDS to refer to any critical work on discourse, which may include but not be limited to CD Analysts. In this chapter I argue that despite criticisms that Pragmatics is individualistic and does not take context sufficiently into account (Fairclough 2001 [1989]: 7–8), it has been valuable both theoretically and methodologically for the critical analysis of discourse.
